TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1029
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) of the Income Tax Act ? 2. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order of the Tribunal, which has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity) has been disallowed. 3. Brief facts of the case are: The assessee is involved in the business of Computer consumables. For the assessment year 2001-2002, by order dated 26.03.2004 passed under Section 143(3) of the Act, certain deductions claimed by the assessee towards salary paid to two lady Directors and to another person was disallowed, as well as another sum of Rs. 26,00,000/- was disallowed under Section 68 of the Act, and also the interest given on the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in upholding the addition of Rs. 26 lakhs treating the same as unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Act? (F) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in law in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 3,64,940 in respect of interest paid to loan creditors? 4. After the confirmation of disallowance by the Tribunal vide order dated 18.03.2011 with regard to the assessment made under Section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Authority initiated penalty proceedings on 27.11.2006 against the respondent-assessee under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Vide order dated 25.10.2011 penalty of Rs. 13,42,000/- was levied for concealment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....additions made were debatable and would lead credence to the bonafides of the assessee. It thus held that the matter of imposing penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, was not exigible in the case on hand. 7. The Tribunal placed reliance on decision of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Nayan Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd., which had also held that "the admission of substantial questions of law by the High Court lends credence to the bona fides of the assessee in claiming deduction. Once it turns out that the claim of the assessee could have been considered for deduction as per a person properly instructed in law and is not completely debarred at all, the mere fact of confirmation of disallowance would not per se lead to the imposition ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is that inaccurate particulars were provided by the assessee in its return, and as such, on such ground the penalty proceedings have rightly been initiated. 12. The information supplied by the assessee in its return cannot be said to be concealment of any information. The facts that are borne out in this case are that the assessee had provided certain particulars with regard to payment of salary and loans which had been taken by the Company from certain individuals. The questions as to whether the benefit of the payment of salary or the loans which were taken is to be given to the assessee has yet not been finalized, as on those very questions, the appeal filed by the assessee has been admitted by the High Court and the said questions are ....